Construction and Building Materials 159 (2018) 175–188

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Construction and Building Materials

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/conbuildmat

Flexural behavior of ECC-concrete composite beams reinforced with

steel bars
Wen-Jie Ge a,⇑, Ashraf F. Ashour b, Xiang Ji a, Chen Cai a, Da-Fu Cao a
a
College of Civil Science and Engineering, Yangzhou University, Yangzhou 225127, China
b
School of Engineering, University of Bradford, Bradford BD7 1DP, UK

h i g h l i g h t s

Calculate formula for deflections, cracking, yield and ultimate moments are proposed.

Experimental testing of steel reinforced ECC-concrete composite beams is carried out.

Various failure modes of ECC-concrete composite beams are identified.

Validation of the proposed equations is achieved against experimental results.

Parametric analysis on the flexural behavior of composite beams is conducted.

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: This paper presents analytical technique and simplified formulas for the calculations of cracking, yield
Received 20 May 2017 and ultimate moments of different cases as well as deflections of ECC-concrete composite beams rein-
Received in revised form 7 September 2017 forced with steel bars. The technique is based on the simplified constitutive models of materials, strain
Accepted 25 October 2017
compatibility, perforce bond of materials and equilibrium of internal forces and moment. Experimental
Available online 4 November 2017
testing of eleven ECC-concrete composite beams reinforced with steel bars is also presented. All beams
tested had the same geometrical dimensions but different steel reinforcement strength and ECC thick-
Keywords:
ness. The proposed formulas showed good agreement with the experimental results of various moment
ECC
Concrete
values and deflections. A parametric analysis shows that yield and ultimate moments increase with the
Composite beams increase of concrete strength in case of compression failure but, essentially, remain unchanged in case of
Flexural behavior tensile failure. With increasing the tensile resistance, for example by increasing ECC height replacement
Ductility ratio, reinforcement ratio, strength of steel reinforcement and ECC, ultimate curvature and energy dissi-
Deflection pation increase in case of tensile failure and decrease in case of compressive failure. On the other hand,
Energy dissipation ductility and energy dissipation ratio decrease with the increase of reinforcement ratio and strength, but,
essentially, remain unchanged with increasing the height replacement ratio and strength of ECC.
Ó 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction multiple micro cracks, leading to a significant increase in strain

Under the combined effects of mechanical loads and environ-
mental exposure, many reinforced concrete structures deteriorate
due to steel corrosion and cannot meet the requirement of ultimate
limit state and durability. Therefore, repair and rehabilitation of
such structures have become a large part of construction activity.
During the last decade, concrete technology has been undergo-
ing rapid development, resulting in the production of a new
concept of engineered cementitious composite (ECC) to overcome
the brittle behavior of cement-based materials. ECC exhibits
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: gewj@yzu.edu.cn (W.-J. Ge).
capacity and ductile behavior. It has also excellent toughness and
energy absorption capacity [1], self-healing ability [2,3], fire
performance [4], remains durable under erosion environment
(sulfate-chloride environment [2], freezing-thawing and sulfate
coupling environment [5]).
Few investigations were devoted to improve the performance of
ECC, such as hybridization with non-round polypropylene fiber and
low modulus polyvinyl alcohol fiber [6], incorporating CaCO3 whis-
ker to improve compressive strength and tensile strain-hardening
[7], increasing slag content improved the ductility, hardened air
content, water absorption, porosity and sorptivity [5], using recy-
cled concrete fines as microsilica sand substitute in the production
of ECC [8], incorporating high volumes of fly ash and micro PVA

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.10.101
0950-0618/Ó 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
176 W.-J. Ge et al. / Construction and Building Materials 159 (2018) 175–188

Nomenclature

es tensile strain in steel bar hp vertical distance of concrete where its strain reaches eco
rs tensile stress in steel bar to the tensile edge of cross-section
fsy yield strength of steel bar q curvature radius of deformed composite beam
esy yield strain of steel bar dh rotating angle increment of cross-section
Es elastic modulus of steel bar u curvature of deformed composite beam
esu ultimate tensile strain of steel bar f maximum deflection of specimen at mid-span
ec compressive strain in concrete S a coefficient related to loading and supporting condition
rc compressive stress in concrete M moment acting on the cross-section
fc concrete compressive strength l0 length of composite beam
eco compressive strain corresponding to concrete stress of fc E elastic modulus of sectional material
ecu ultimate compressive strain of concrete I inertia moment of cross-section
fcu,k concrete cube compressive strength Mcr cracking moment of cross-section
n a coefficient related to the compressive stress-strain ucr cross-section curvature corresponding to cracking mo-
relationship of concrete ment
ect tensile strain in concrete My yield moment of cross-section
rct tensile stress in concrete uy cross-section curvature corresponding to yield moment
ectu ultimate uniaxial tensile strain of concrete Mu ultimate moment of cross-section
fctu ultimate uniaxial tensile stress of concrete uu cross-section curvature corresponding to ultimate mo-
eec compressive strain in ECC ment
rec compressive tress in ECC uu curvature ductility of cross-section
fecp compressive strength of ECC (peak point of ECC com- Ey energy dissipation capacity of elastic stage
pressive stress-strain curve) Ep energy dissipation capacity of whole stage (up to ulti-
eecp compressive strain corresponding to peak stress of ECC mate curvature uu)
fecp rE energy dissipation ratio
fecu ultimate compressive stress of ECC (after peak point) l length of composite beam
eecu ultimate compressive strain corresponding to ultimate lm length of the pure flexural span
stress of ECC fecu lmv length of the flexural-shear span
eet tensile strain in ECC lf length of the free overhang span
ret tensile stress in ECC rh ECC height replacement ratio
fetc tensile stress of ECC at first cracking h0 effective height of cross-section
eetc tensile strain of ECC at first cracking fsu ultimate tensile strength of steel bar
fetu ultimate tensile strength of ECC Mcr,t experimental cracking moment
eetu ultimate tensile strain of ECC My,t experimental yield moment
b width of cross-section Mu,t experimental ultimate moment
h height of cross-section Mcr,c predicted cracking moment
hs distance of the center of steel bars to the cross-section My,c predicted yield moment
tensile edge Mu,c1 predicted ultimate moment by using yield strength of
he thickness of ECC steel reinforcement
ht height of cross-section part in tension (neutral axis Mu,c2 predicted ultimate moment by using ultimate strength
depth) of steel reinforcement
x vertical distance of any point to the tensile edge of qs reinforcement ratio.
cross-section

fibers to improve the cyclic freeze-thaw resistance and microstruc-
ture of ECC [3,9], adding waterproofing admixture to improve wet-
ting property and reduce the sorptivity, and shrinkage-reducing
admixture together with calcium sulfoaluminate cement to control
the drying shrinkage [10].
Experimental study showed that the use of ECC in the tensile
zone around longitudinal steel reinforcement has slightly
improved both the flexural capacity [11–13] and deformation abil-
ity [12,13], but significantly reduced the crack width before yield-
ing of steel reinforcement [12]. Therefore, durability of composite
ECC/reinforced concrete elements can be greatly improved due to
the enhancement of waterproof and corrosion resistance [14–16].
A theoretical analysis of bending resistance of ECC-RC composite
beams was developed and it is compared well with the experimen-
tal results [17,18]. On the other hand, when the ECC thickness
increased beyond a certain critical value, both the flexural strength
and ductility of ECC-concrete composite beams significantly
enhanced [19,20].
Because of its excellent tensile performance, ECC can be used in
strengthening unreinforced masonry walls [16,21–23], reducing
the extensive amount of transverse reinforcements in beam-
column joints of rigid-framed bridges, enhancing the joint seismic
resistance and reducing reinforcement congestion and construc-
tion complexity [24–27]. ECC can also be used in hydraulic struc-
tures for its good durability [2,16,28], highway engineering for its
ability of withstanding large deformations from heavy loading
and temperature variations [29], in hot arid coastal climatic condi-
tion structures [30], in lightweight building facade and pavement
[31], in pavement overlay to extend the service life [32] and in
impact and blast resistant protective panels [16]. The wide range
of applications of ECC demonstrates that incorporating ECC can sig-
nificantly improve the performance of structures and reduce the
associated life cycle cost.
Theoretical analysis covering the whole loading process of com-
posite beams is still limited. Based on simplified constitutive mod-
els of materials and equilibrium of internal forces and moments,
 W.-J. Ge et al. / Construction and Building Materials 159 (2018) 175–188 177

mechanical behavior of composite beams is predicted below. Phys- is the compressive strain corresponding to concrete stress of fc, ecu
ical flexural testing of ECC-concrete composite beams reinforced (0.0033) is the ultimate compressive strain of concrete, fcu,k is
with different ECC height replacement ratio and strength of steel the concrete cube compressive strength and n (2.0) is a coefficient
reinforcement were also conducted, that is used to validate the related to the compressive stress-strain relationship of concrete.
developed analytical analysis. Experimental study shows that com- The concrete uniaxial tensile stress-strain model is shown in
pared with normal concrete beam, ECC-concrete composite beam Fig. 2(b) and can be represented by the following equation.
has slightly improved both the flexural capacity and deformation 
f ctu ect =ectu ; 0 6 ect 6 ectu
ability, significantly reduced the crack width before yielding of rct ¼ ð5Þ
steel reinforcement, agreeing with the results obtained by refer- 0; ect > ectu
ence [11–13]. A detailed parametric study is, then, carried out to where ect and rct are the tensile strain and stress in concrete,
establish the variation of mechanical behavior (yield moment, ulti- respectively, ectu and fctu are the ultimate uniaxial tensile strain
mate moment, ultimate curvature, ductility, energy disspation and and stress, respectively.
energy dissipation ratio) of composite beams with the main influ-
ential parameters (such as ECC height replacement ratio, reinforce-
2.3. ECC
ment ratio, strength of steel reinforcement, concrete and ECC).
Parametric study shows that, with increasing the ECC height
The compressive stress-strain curve [34] of ECC is shown in
replacement ratio, ultimate curvature increases in case of tensile
Fig. 3(a) and can be formulated by:
failure, this result similar to the trend observed in reference
8
[19,20], but decreases in case of compressive failure. Calculate for- < 2f ecp =eecp eec ;
> 0 6 eec 6 eecp =3
mula of cracking, yield moment ultimate moment and deflections rec ¼ 2f ecp =3 þ f ecp =ð2eecp Þðeec  eecp =3Þ; eecp =3 < eec 6 eecp
>
:
of ECC-concrete composite beams as well as the results obtained f ecp þ ðf ecu  f ecp Þ=ðeecu  eecp Þðeec  eecp Þ; eecp < eec 6 eecu
from the experimental and parametric study can be taken as refer-
ð6Þ
ence in practice application.
where eec and rec are the compressive strain and stress in ECC,
2. Constitutive models of materials respectively, fecp and eecp are the compressive strength (peak point
of the curve) and corresponding strain, respectively, fecu and eecu are
2.1. Steel reinforcement the ultimate compressive stress (after peak point) and correspond-
ing strain, respectively. In this paper, it is assumed that fecu = 0.5 fecp
The constitutive relationships of steel bars in tension and com- and eecu = 1.5 eecp [34].
pression are simplified to a bilinear model as shown in Fig. 1 [33], The tensile stress-strain curve [14] of ECC is shown in Fig. 3(b)
where es and rs are the tensile strain and stress in steel bar, respec- and can be expressed by the following equation.
tively, esy and fsy are the yield strain and stress, respectively, Es is 
f etc =eetc eet ; 0 6 eet 6 eetc
the elastic modulus and esu is the ultimate tensile strain (assumed ret ¼
to be 0.01). f etc þ ðf etu  f etc Þ=ðeetu  eetc Þðeet  eetc Þ; eetc < eet 6 eetu
ð7Þ
2.2. Concrete
where eet and ret are the tensile strain and stress in ECC, respec-
tively, eetc and fetc are the tensile strain at first cracking and corre-
The compressive stress-strain curve of concrete [33] is shown in
sponding stress, respectively, eetu and fetu are the ultimate tensile
Fig. 2(a) and can be expressed by:
( strain and corresponding stress, respectively.
f c ð1  ð1  ec =eco Þn Þ; 0 6 ec 6 eco
rl ¼ ð1Þ
f c; eco < ec 6 ecu 3. Cross-section analysis of composite beams

n ¼ 2  ðf cu;k  50Þ=60 ð2Þ The analysis below is developed for a rectangular beam section;
however, it can be easily modified for other section shapes. The fol-
lowing assumptions have been considered:
eco ¼ 0:002 þ 0:5ðf cu;k  50Þ  105 ð3Þ

The steel bars and concrete/ECC have perfect bond and no
ecu ¼ 0:0033  0:5ðf cu;k  50Þ  105 ð4Þ delamination between ECC and concrete is considered as
where ec and rc are the compressive strain and stress in concrete, observed in experimental investigations [35].
respectively, fc is the concrete compressive strength, eco (0.002)
Each plane cross section perpendicular to the axis of the beam
remains plane after loading.

The whole loading process can be divided into three stages:
1. Elastic stage (uncracked section): from being loading to crack-
ing (ECC or concrete).
2. Working stress stage: from cracking to yielding of steel bars.
3. Failure stage: from yielding of steel bars to failure of composite
beams (i.e. any material reaches its ultimate strain: (a). Com-
pressive strain in concrete reaches ecu. (b). Tensile strain in steel
bars reaches esu. (c). Tensile strain in ECC reaches eetu).

The cross-section stress-strain distributions of each loading

stage are shown in Fig. 4, where b and h are the width and height
of cross-section, respectively, hs is the distance of the center of
steel bars to the cross-section tensile edge, he is the thickness of
Fig. 1. Constitutive relationships of steel bar. ECC, ht is the height of cross-section part in tension (neutral axis
178 W.-J. Ge et al. / Construction and Building Materials 159 (2018) 175–188

c ct
fctu
fc

0 co cu c 0 ctu ct

(a) Compression (b) Tension

Fig. 2. Constitutive relationships of concrete.

(a) Compression (b) Tension

Fig. 3. Constitutive relationships of ECC.

depth), x is the vertical distance of any point to the tensile edge of calculated for each value of eet. According to the moment equilib-
P
cross-section, eet is the maximum tensile strain in ECC, ect and ec rium of cross-section, M = 0, the cross-section moment can, then,
are the maximum tensile and compressive strain in concrete, be obtained from:
respectively, es is the tensile strain in steel bars and hp is the verti-
cal distance of concrete where its strain reaches eco to the tensile Z h Z he Z ht
edge of cross-section, hp = ht(1 + eco/eet). M¼ rðxÞbxdx  rðxÞbxdx  rðxÞbxdx  rs As hs ð10Þ
ht 0 he
The cross-section strain distribution can be expressed as:

ð1  x=ht Þeet ; 0 6 x 6 ht The cross-section analysis of composite beams in different
eðxÞ ¼ ð8Þ
ðx=ht  1Þeet ; ht < x 6 h stages are shown in Fig.4 and Table 1, including strains, stresses
in concrete and ECC, neutral axis depth and moment for each stage.
When x = hs, the strain and stress in steel bars are es = eet(ht  hs)/ht
and rs = Eseet(ht  hs)/ht, respectively, but rs = fsy when es  esy.
P 4. Cracking, yielding and ultimate moments of composite
According to force equilibrium of cross-section, N = 0, the fol-
beams
lowing equation can be obtained.
Z he Z ht Z h 4.1. Cracking moment
rðxÞbdx þ rðxÞbdx þ rs As  rðxÞbdx ¼ 0 ð9Þ
0 he ht
(1) Case 1: ECC cracking before concrete
Substituting stress and strain into Eq. (9), then the neutral axis When ECC incurs crack before concrete, eet = eetc, the neutral
depth ht can be obtained as presented in Table 1 for different stages axis depth ht can be obtained from Eq. (12), and the cracking
of loading and failure. Therefore, the neutral axis depth ht can be moment in this case can be expresses as below:

Fig. 4. Cross-section stress-strain distribution of each stage: (a) beam cross section; (b) strain distribution; (c) to (i) stress distribution for various loading stages as explained
in Table 1.
 W.-J. Ge et al. / Construction and Building Materials 159 (2018) 175–188 179

Table 1
Cross-section analyses of composite beams in different stages.

(1) Elastic stage (uncracked section) (Fig. 4(c))

Strain ec < eco ; eet < eetc; ect < ectu; es ¼ eet ðht  hs Þ=ht < esy
8
Stress in concrete/ECC < f etc =eetc eðxÞ; 0 6 x 6 he (11)
rðxÞ ¼ f ctu =ectu eðxÞ; he < x 6 ht
:
f c ð2eðxÞ=eco  eðxÞ =eco Þ; ht < x 6 h
2 2
     
Neutral axis depth ht 2fectuctu  efcoc  f3cee2et þ ht f etc f c heet
þ ht  2etceetce þ 2ctuectue  Es Abs hs  f ec coh  f c he2 eet þ f c3he2eet ¼ 0 (12)
3 2 he f ctu he E s As 2f c h f h2 f h2 2 2 3

eetc  ectu þ b þ eco þ e2co


co
      
co co

Moment f be (13)
M ¼ f cebcoeet 2h beet he f ctu beet ht
2 2 2 2 3 2 2 3

6  2 þ 3ht  ht eet Es As hs
3 4 3 2
2 h h he he he ht hs
3ht
 h þ 3t  ce2 et h 2  2h 3ht
þ h2  12t  f etceetc 2  3ht  ectu
co 4ht

(2) Working stress stage: Case 1-ECC cracks before concrete (Fig. 4(d))
Strain ec < eco ; eet P eetc; ect < ectu; es ¼ eet ðht  hs Þ=ht < esy
8
Stress in concrete/ECC < f etc þ ðf etu  f etc Þ=ðeetu  eetc ÞðeðxÞ  eetc Þ; 0 6 x 6 he (14)
rðxÞ ¼ f ctu eðxÞ=ectu ; he < x 6 ht
:
f c ð2eðxÞ=eco  eðxÞ2 =e2co Þ; ht < x 6 h
     2 
Neutral axis depth ht 2fectuctu  efcoc  f3cee2et þ ht f etc eetc Þ  f ctu he þ Es As þ 2f c h þ f c heet þ h  he f etu f etc þ f ctu he  Es As hs  f c h2  f c h2 eet þ f c h3 eet ¼ 0 (15)
2
3 2 he f etu f etc
eet þ eetu eetc e ðh  h e eet ectu b eco e2co t 2 eetu eetc 2ectu b eco e2co 3e2co

co
      
Moment f c be2et (16)
M ¼ f cebcoeet 2h eet eetc  f ctu beet ht  he þ he  f etc bhe
2 2 2 2 3 2
2 he eet
e f etu f etc
3 4 3 2
2 ht ht ht hs
3ht
 h þ 3  e 2
h
2  2h
3ht
þ h
2  12  ht et E s A s h s þ eetu eetc bh e 3ht  2 ectu 6 2 3ht 2
co 4ht

(3) Working stress stage: Case 2-Concrete cracks before ECC (Fig. 4(e))
Strain ec < eco ; eet < eetc ; ect P ectu ; es ¼ eet ðht  hs Þ=ht < esy
8
Stress in concrete/ECC < f etc =eetc eðxÞ; 0 6 x 6 he (17)
rðxÞ ¼ 0; he < x 6 ht
:
f c ð2eðxÞ=eco  eðxÞ =eco Þ; ht < x 6 h
2 2
     
Neutral axis depth ht  efcoc  f3cee2et þ ht f etc f c heet
 Es Abs hs  f ec coh  f c he2 eet þ f c3he2eet ¼ 0 (18)
2 2 2 3
3 2 he E s As 2f c h
eetc þ b þ eco þ e2co þ ht  f2etceetc
he

 3
co
    2 
co co

Moment f b e2 (19)
M ¼ f cebcoeet 2h beet he
h2 h2 h3e
2  3ht  ht eet Es As hs
4 3 2
2 ht hs
3ht
 h þ 3t  ce2 et h 2  2h 3ht
þ h2  12t  f etceetc
co 4ht

(4) Working stress stage: Case 3- Compressive concrete in the elastic stage after cracking and steel bars not yielded (Fig. 4(f))
Strain ec < eco ; eet P eetc ; ect P ectu ; es ¼ eet ðht  hs Þ=ht < esy
8
Stress in concrete/ECC < f etc þ ðf etu  f etc Þ=ðeetu  eetc ÞðeðxÞ  eetc Þ; 0 6 x 6 he (20)
rðxÞ ¼ 0; he < x 6 ht
:
f c ð2eðxÞ=eco  eðxÞ2 =e2co Þ; ht < x 6 h
       2 
Neutral axis depth ht efcoc þ f3cee2et þ ht  f etc eetc f c heet
þ f ec coh þ f c he2 eet  f c3he2eet ¼ 0 (21)
2 2 3
3 2 he f etu f etc 2f c h h etu f etc
Es As
eet  eetueetc 1  eet he  b  eco  e2co þ ht 2e ef etu eetc þ
E s As h s
b

co
   co co

Moment f c be2et bhe eet f etu f etc (22)

M ¼ f cebcoeet 2h
2 2 2 3 2
bhe f etu f etc
e e e
3 2 ht h4 2h3 h2 ht f etc bhe ht hs
3ht
 h þ 3  e 2 2  3ht
þ 2  12  2 þ 3ht eetu eetc
 2 eetu eetc ð et  etc Þ  ht et E s As hs
co 4ht

(5) Working stress stage: Case 3- Compressive concrete in the elastic stage after cracking and steel bars yielded (Fig. 4(g))
Strain ec < eco ; eet P eetc ; ect P ectu ; es ¼ eet ðht  hs Þ=ht P esy
     2 
Neutral axis depth ht  efcoc  f3cee2et þ ht f etc eetc f c heet f c h eet
þ f c3he2eet ¼ 0 (23)
2 2 3
3 2 he f etu f etc f sy As 2f c h h etu f etc
eet þ eetu eetc ð1  eet Þhe þ beet þ eco þ e2co þ ht  2e ef etu fch
eetc  eco  e2co
 3
co
  co

Moment 2 (24)
f c be2et bhe eet f etu f etc
M ¼ f cebcoeet 2h
2 2 3 2
bhe f etu f etc
e e
2 ht 4 3 2 ht f etc bhe
3ht
 h þ 3  e2
h
2  2h
3ht
þ h
2  12  2 þ 3ht eetu eetc
 2 eetu eetc ð et  etc Þ  f sy s hs
A
co 4ht

(6) Working stress stage: Case 4- Compressive concrete in the plastic stage after cracking and steel bars not yielded (Fig. 4(h))
Strain ec P eco ; eet P eetc ; ect P ectu ; es ¼ eet ðht  hs Þ=ht < esy
8
Stress in concrete/ECC >
> f þ ðf etu  f etc Þ=ðeetu  eetc ÞðeðxÞ  eetc Þ; 0 6 x 6 he (25)
< etc
he < x 6 ht
rðxÞ ¼ 0;
> f c ð2eðxÞ=eco  eðxÞ =e2co Þ;
2
> ht < x 6 hp
:
f c; hp < x 6 h
     
e h2
Neutral axis depth h f þ f c eco þ h f h þ f etu f etc ðe  e Þh þ Es As eet  f h þ  et e f etu f etc  Es eet As hs ¼ 0 (26)
2
t c 3eet t etc e eetu eetc et etc e b c 2 eetu eetc b
   
Moment 2
e eco he eet
2
(27)
 e2et þ eetc
2
M ¼ f c bh
2  f c bht
2 co
2
12 ete þ 2 þ 3eet
1
 ht hh
t
s
eet Es As hs þ bhe ef etu
etu f etc
eetc
2
3ht 2 
f etc bhe
2

(7) Failure stage: Compressive concrete in the plastic stage after cracking and steel bars yielded (Fig. 4(i))
Strain ec P eco ; eet P eetc ; ect P ectu ; es ¼ eet ðht  hs Þ=ht P esy
   
Neutral axis depth h f þ f c eco þ h f h þ f etu f etc h ðe  e Þ þ sy s  f h  he eet f etu f etc ¼ 0 (28)
2
2 f A
t c 3eet t etc e eetu eetc e et etc b c 2 eetu eetc
   
Moment 2
e2co 2 2
(29)
þ 3eecoet þ 12  f etu f etc 2he eet
 eet þ eetc  f sy As hs
2 f etc bhe bhe
M ¼ f c bh
2  f c bht 12e2et 2 þ 2 eetu eetc 3ht

!
f beetc 2h
3 2
2 h depth ht can be calculated and the cracking moment in this case
M cr ¼ c h þ t
eco 3ht 3 can be expressed as below:
! !
  f c bectu
3 3
f c be2etc 2h h
4 3 2 2
h 2h h ht 2 1 he Mcr ¼
2
 h ht þ t
  þ   f bh  eco ðht  he Þ 3
e2co 2
4ht 3ht 2 12 etc e
2 3ht 3
! !
f c be2ctu
4 3 2 2 4
f ctu beetc h 2h ht h ht ht
2 2 3
ht he h ht  hs   þ 
  þ e  eetc Es As hs ð30Þ
ðht  he Þ e2co 4
2
ectu 6 2 3ht ht 3 2 12
! !
f etc bectu
2 3 3 2 3
(2) Case 2: concrete cracking before ECC he ht he f ctu b ht he ht he
    þ
When concrete cracks before ECC, the maximum tensile strain eetc ðht  he Þ 2 3 ht  he 6 2 3
of concrete ect = ectu and the maximum tensile strain of ECC eet = ht  hs
ectuht/(ht  he) < eetc. Substituting eet into Eq. (12), the neutral axis  ectu Es As hs ð31Þ
ht  he
180 W.-J. Ge et al. / Construction and Building Materials 159 (2018) 175–188

4.2. Yield moment (3) Case 3: Steel-reinforcement rupture failure

When the area of steel reinforcement is too small to allow steel
(1) Case 1: Compressive concrete in the elastic stage after bars rupture before compressive concrete reaches the plastic stage.
cracking In this case, ec < eco and es = esu, the maximum tensile strain in ECC
In such case, the maximum compressive strain in concrete ec  eet and the maximum compressive strain in concrete ec can be
eco, the tensile strain in steel bars es = esy and the maximum tensile obtained according to the geometrical relationship of cross-
strain in ECC eet = esyht/(ht  hs), the neutral axis depth ht can be section, eet = esuht/(ht  hs), ec = esu(h  ht)/(ht  hs). The neutral
calculated from Eq. (21) and the yield moment in this case can axis depth ht can be calculated by Eq. (23) and the ultimate
be expressed as below: moment of this case can be expressed as below:
! !
f c besy
3 3
f c besu
3 3
2h 2 h 2h h
My ¼  h ht þ t Mu ¼
2
 h ht þ t
eco ðht  hs Þ 3 3 eco ðht  hs Þ 3 3
! !
f c be2sy
h
4 3 2 2
2h ht h ht ht
4 2
f etc bhe f c be2suh
4 3 2 2
2h ht h ht ht
4
f bh
2
  þ     þ   etc e
ðht  hs Þ e2co 4
2 3 2 12 2 ðht  hs Þ eco 4
2 2 3 2 12 2
   
ht esy 2he esy
2
bh f  f etc bh f  f etc ht esu 2he esu
2
 e etu  eetc   f sy As hs ð32Þ  e etu  eetc   f sy As hs ð36Þ
2 eetu  eetc ht  hs 3ðht  hs Þ 2 eetu  eetc ht  hs 3ðht  hs Þ
(2) Case 2: Compressive concrete in the plastic stage after It is to be noted that it is unlikely that ECC reaches the ultimate
cracking tensile strain before yielding steel due to the high tensile strain eetu
For this case, the maximum compressive strain of concrete eco < of ECC at failure; therefore, this mode of failure is not considered.
ec  ecu, the tensile strain in steel bars es = esy and the maximum
tensile strain in ECC eet = esyht/(ht  hs). Substituting eet into Eq. 4.4. Deflection
(23), ht can be calculated and the yield moment in this case can
be expressed as below: The curvature of a composite beam is shown in Fig. 5, where q is
! the curvature radius of deformed composite beam, dh is the rotat-
f c bh
2 2
e
ðht  hs Þ 2co
2
ht ðht  hs Þht eco
My ¼  f cb þ þ ing angle increment of cross-section. The maximum tensile strain
2 e
2
12 sy 2 3esy
in ECC eet can be calculated as below:
 
2he esy ht esy
2 2
f etc bhe bhe f etu  f etc ðq þ ht Þdh  qdh
 þ  þ eetc eet ¼ ¼ ht = q ð37Þ
2 2 eetu  eetc 3ðht  hs Þ ht  hs qdh
 f sy As hs ð33Þ
The cross-section curvature of a composite beam can be also
expressed as below:
4.3. Ultimate moment
u ¼ 1=q ¼ eet =ht ð38Þ
(1) Case 1: Under-reinforced failure Based on the above analysis, eet and ht for different moments
The maximum compressive strain in concrete ec = ecu, the max- can be obtained. Substituting eet, ht into formula (38), the curvature
imum compressive stress in concrete rc = fc and the maximum ten- at different moments can be calculated.
sile strain in ECC eet = ecuht/(h  ht). Substituting eet into Eq. (28), ht According to the theory of structural mechanics, the maximum
can be calculated and the ultimate moment in this case can be deflection at mid-span of a simply supported beam can be calcu-
expressed as below: lated as below:
!
ðh  ht Þ e2co ht ðh  ht Þht eco
2 2 2 2
f c bh f ¼ SMl0 =ðEIÞ ð39Þ
Mu ¼  f cb þ þ
2 12e2cu 2 3ecu
where f is the maximum deflection at mid-span, S is a coefficient
 
2he ecu ht ecu
2 2
f bh bh f  f etc related to loading and supporting condition, M is the moment acting
 etc e þ e etu  þ eetc
2 2 eetu  eetc 3ðh  ht Þ h  ht on the cross-section, l0 is the element length, E is the elastic modu-
lus of sectional material and I is the inertia moment of cross-
 f sy As hs ð34Þ
section. As the flexural stiffness of cross-section EI = M/u, formula
(2) Case 2: Over-reinforced failure (39) can be expressed as below:
If the composite beam is over-reinforced, steel reinforcement
would not yield while compressive strain in concrete reaches the
ultimate crushing strain. In this case, ec = ecu and es < esy, the
maximum tensile strain in ECC, eet, and strain in steel reinforce-
ment, es, can be obtained according to the geometrical relationship,
eet = ecuht/(h  ht), es = ecu(ht  hs)/(h  ht). The neutral axis depth dθ
ht can be calculated by Eq. (26) and the ultimate moment of this
ρ

case can be expressed as below:

!
ðh  ht Þ e2co ht ðh  ht Þht eco
2 2 2
f c bh
Mu ¼  f cb þ þ Concrete
2 12e2cu 2 3ecu dx= ρdθ
 
ht

2he ecu ht ecu

2 2
f bh bh f  f etc
 etc e þ e etu  þ eetc
2 2 eetu  eetc 3ðh  ht Þ h  ht
ht  hs ECC
 ecu Es As hs ð35Þ
h  ht Fig. 5. Curvature distribution of composite beam unit.
 W.-J. Ge et al. / Construction and Building Materials 159 (2018) 175–188
f ¼ Sl0 =q ¼ Sl0 eet =ht
2 2
4.5. Ductility and energy dissipation
The moment-curvature model of composite beams is shown in
Fig. 6, where Mcr and ucr are the cracking moment and correspond-
ing curvature, respectively, My and uy are the yield moment and
corresponding curvature, respectively, Mu and uu are the ultimate
moment and corresponding curvature, respectively.
The composite beam ductility can be calculated from uu = uu/uy,
whereas the area under the M-u curve is used to represent the
energy dissipation capacity. In the elastic stage, the actual M-u
curve is the solid line and it is simplified to the dotted line as
shown in the model in Fig. 6.
Energy dissipation capacity of elastic stage can be calculated as
below:
Ey ¼ M y uy =2
Energy dissipation capacity of the whole stage (up to uu) can be
calculated as below:
Ep ¼ M y uy =2 þ ðM y þ M u Þðuu  uy Þ=2
In order to compare the energy dissipation capacity of the
whole stage with the elastic stage, energy dissipation ratio rE is
introduced.
r E ¼ Ep =Ey
5. Experimental verifications
In this section, physical testing results of composite ECC/con-
crete beams reinforced with steel bars are presented. The main
purpose of the experimental programme is to provide real data
for the validation of the proposed analytical procedure presented
above before it is used for a comprehensive parametric study.
5.1. Test specimens design
Three group specimens with different strength of steel rein-
forcement were cast and tested [36]. Each group had four speci-
mens with different ECC thickness whereas the grade of main
longitudinal steel was the main parameter changed from one
group to another. Design details are shown in Table 2 and the sche-
matic diagram of specimens is shown in Fig. 7. The specimen size b
 h  l = 150  200  1500 mm, pure flexural span lm = 400 mm,
flexural-shear span lmv = 500 mm, free overhang span lf = 50 mm,
cross-section effective height h0 = 175 mm, distance of the center
of steel bars to concrete tensile edge hs = 25 mm, he is the thickness
of ECC, rh is ECC height replacement ratio, defined as the ratio of
ECC thickness to the height of the beam cross-section, rh = he/h0.
All notations are defined in Fig. 7. In casting ECC-concrete compos-
ite test specimens, the layered pouring method was adopted,
where ECC was poured into the mould first and compacted, and
Mu
My
M cr
0 cr y u
Fig. 6. Moment-curvature of composite beams.
181
ð40Þ then concrete was poured and compacted. This technique proved
to achieve a good bond between ECC and concrete [35].
5.2. Materials
The concrete mechanical properties as required by the model
presented in Fig. 2 were measured [37]: the cube compressive
strength fcu,k = 47.00 Nmm2, compressive strength fc = 30.16
Nmm2, tensile strength fct = 2.55 Nmm2 and ultimate tensile
strain ectu = 1.10  104. On the other hand, mechanical properties
of steel reinforcement [38] are shown in Table 3.
Tensile and compressive tests of ECC were also conducted [39],
and multiple cracks and tensile stress-strain curves are shown in
Fig. 8(a) and (b), respectively. The tensile strength at first cracking
fetc = 2.0 Nmm2, ultimate tensile strength fetu = 2.4 Nmm2, ten-
sile strain at first cracking eetc = 0.23  103, ultimate tensile strain
eetu = 0.025, compressive strength fecp = 31.4 Nmm2 and corre-
ð41Þ sponding strain eecp = 0.0036. The compressive stress-strain curves
of ECC are also shown in Fig. 9.
5.3. Comparison between experimental and theoretical results
ð42Þ
Comparisons of experimental and calculated load-deflection
curves are shown in Fig. 10 for specimens of group CBSE. As can
be seen from this figure, experimental and predicted curves show
good agreements. The predicted ultimate moment is always lower
ð43Þ than the experimental moment as the yield strength of steel rein-
forcement is used in the calculation instead of ultimate tensile
strength. Comparisons of cracking, yield and ultimate moments
are also presented in Table 4, where Mcr,t, My,t and Mu,t are exper-
imental cracking, yield and ultimate moment, respectively, Mcr,c
and My,c are predicted cracking and yield moment, respectively,
Mu,c1 and Mu,c2 are calculated ultimate moment by using yield
strength and ultimate strength of steel reinforcement, respectively.
As can be seen from Table 4, average values of Mcr,c/Mcr,e, My,c/
My,e, Mu,c1/Mu,e and Mu,c2/Mu,e are 0.94, 0.94, 0.82 and 0.99, respec-
tively, and their variation coefficients are 0.05, 0.06, 0.09 and 0.06,
respectively, showing good agreement between predicted and
experimental moment results.
Loading-deflection curves and loading-crack width curves of
group CBSE are shown in Figs. 11and 12, respectively.
As can be seen from Table 4, Figs. 11 and 12, compared with
normal concrete beam (CBSE1), ECC-concrete composite beams
(CBSE2, CBSE3) and ECC beam (CBSE5) are slightly improved both
the flexural capacity and deformation ability, but significantly
reduced the crack width before yielding of steel reinforcement.
6. Parametric studies
In this section, the effect of main parameters, such as ECC height
replacement ratio, reinforcement ratio, strength of steel reinforce-
ment, concrete and ECC on mechanical behaviors of composite
beams are examined. When one parameter is changed, other basic
parameters are kept constant at the following values: ECC height
replacement ratio rh is 0.29, reinforcement ratio qs are 0.6% and
1.53%, yield strength of steel reinforcement fyk is 400 Nmm2,
compressive strength of C45 grade concrete fc is 29.6 Nmm2,
ECC tensile strength at first cracking fetc is 2.0 Nmm2, ECC ulti-
mate tensile strength ftu is 2.4 Nmm2, ECC tensile strain at first
cracking eetc is 0.00025 and ECC ultimate tensile strain eetu is 0.025.
The composite beam cross-section is assumed to be failed when
maximum concrete compressive strain, ec, tensile strains in steel
bars, es, or tensile strains in ECC, eet, reaches 0.0033, 0.01 or
0.025, respectively. The failure modes can be predicted by the pro-
posed model, namely tensile failure (tensile strain in steel rein-
182 W.-J. Ge et al. / Construction and Building Materials 159 (2018) 175–188

Table 2
Specimen design parameters.

F F
B A concrete

B A
lf lmv lm ECC lmv lf
l
b b
erection bars
h0 h0 stirrups
h h

as he hs he
steel bars steel bars
A-A B-B
Fig. 7. Schematic diagram of ECC-concrete composite beams.

Table 3
Mechanical properties of steel reinforcement.

Bars Diameter/mm fsy/(Nmm2) fsu/(Nmm2) Es/(1  103 Nmm2)

HRB335 12 340 460 199
HRB400 8 406 485 198
HRB400 10 403 495 198
HRB400 12 408 503 199
HRB500 12 507 630 199

(a) Multiple cracks (b) Stress-strain curves

Fig. 8. Typical characteristics of ECC in tension.

forcement reaches esu first), compressive failure (concrete com-
pressive strain reaches ecu after yielding of steel reinforcement)
and over-reinforced failure (concrete compressive strain reaches
ecu before yielding of steel reinforcement). In order to distinguish
the three failure modes, two balanced failure points are identified,
namely balanced failure point 1 is defined when tensile strain in
steel reinforcement and maximum concrete compressive strain
simultaneously reaches their respective ultimate values, whereas
balanced failure point 2 indicates tensile strain in steel reinforce-
ment reaches yield strain and maximum concrete compressive
strain reach the ultimate strain at the same time. The ultimate val-
ues of each material are defined above.
6.1. ECC strength and height replacement ratio
The correlation curves of mechanical behavior and the ECC
Strength fetu, ECC height replacement ratio rh are shown in
Fig. 13. Two steel reinforcement ratios qs (0.60% and 1.53%), five
 W.-J. Ge et al. / Construction and Building Materials 159 (2018) 175–188 183

(a) Whole curves (b) Local curves and fitting curve

Fig. 9. Compressive stress-strain curves of ECC.

(a) CBSE1 (b) CBSE2

(c) CBSE3 (d) CBSE5

Fig. 10. Comparison of moment-deflection curves.

Table 4
Comparison of cracking, yield, ultimate moment (unit/kNm).

NO. rh Mcr,e My,e Mu,e Mcr,c My,c Mu,c1 Mu,c2 Mcr,c/Mcr,e My,c/My,e Mu,c1/Mu,e Mu,c2/Mu,e
CBSA1 0.00 3.00 11.30 16.78 3.08 10.67 11.64 15.47 1.03 0.94 0.69 0.92
CBSA2 0.29 4.06 14.00 18.75 3.60 13.37 14.41 18.05 0.89 0.96 0.77 0.96
CBSA3 0.57 3.99 15.78 19.35 3.57 14.75 16.04 19.58 0.89 0.93 0.83 1.01
CBSA5 1.14 3.48 15.05 19.37 3.20 14.67 16.33 19.53 0.92 0.98 0.84 1.01
CBSE1 0.00 3.26 14.69 19.25 3.08 13.26 13.83 16.82 0.94 0.90 0.72 0.87
CBSE2 0.29 3.74 16.18 19.50 3.60 15.46 16.48 19.33 0.96 0.96 0.85 0.99
CBSE3 0.57 3.75 17.93 19.75 3.57 16.82 18.05 20.83 0.95 0.94 0.91 1.05
CBSE5 1.14 3.26 17.36 22.50 3.20 15.71 18.19 20.68 0.98 0.90 0.81 0.92
CBSF1 0.00 3.28 16.95 21.04 3.08 15.88 16.72 20.68 0.94 0.94 0.79 0.98
CBSF3 0.57 3.71 20.69 23.26 3.57 19.89 20.74 24.43 0.96 0.96 0.89 1.05
CBSF5 1.14 3.74 17.69 22.60 3.20 17.93 20.60 23.88 0.86 1.01 0.91 1.06
Mean 0.94 0.94 0.82 0.99
Variation 0.05 0.06 0.09 0.06
184 W.-J. Ge et al. / Construction and Building Materials 159 (2018) 175–188
Fig. 11. Loading-deflection curves.
Fig. 12. Loading-crack width curves.
height replacement ratios rh (0, 0.14, 0.29, 0.43 and 0.57) and eight
ECC strengths (fetc1 = 1.5 Nmm2, fetu1 = 1.8 Nmm2, fetc2 = 2.0
Nmm2, fetu2 = 2.4 Nmm2, fetc3 = 2.5 Nmm2, fetu3 = 3.0 Nmm2,
fetc4 = 3.0 Nmm2, fetu4 = 3.6 Nmm2, fetc5 = 3.5 Nmm2, fetu5 =
4.2 Nmm2, fetc6 = 4.0 Nmm2, fetu6 = 4.8 Nmm2, fetc7 = 4.5
Nmm2, fetu7 = 5.4 Nmm2, fetc8 = 5.0 Nmm2, fetu8 = 6.0 Nmm2)
are studied.
As can be seen from Fig. 13, the yield and ultimate moments
increase with increasing the strength or the height replacement
ratio of ECC; the moment increasing rate of beams with lower rein-
forcement ratio (qs = 0.6%) is higher than that of beams with higher
reinforcement ratio (qs = 1.53%).
For composite beams with lower reinforcement ratio (qs =
0.6%), failure modes are tensile failure - rupture of steel reinforce-
ment. With increasing the ECC strength or the ECC height replace-
ment ratio, ECC can provide more tensile resistance. In order to
provide more compression to counterpoise the increased tensile
resistance, maximum concrete compressive strain increases
accordingly. So, the ultimate curvature increases as maximum con-
crete compressive strain increases while the tensile rupture strain
of steel reinforcement is a fixed value.
For composite beams with higher reinforcement ratio (qs =
1.53%), failure modes are compressive failure - crushing of con-
crete. With increasing the ECC strength or the ECC height replace-
ment ratio, ECC can provide more tensile resistance. The tensile
resistance provided by ECC together with less tensile resistance
(compared with the specimen with lower ECC strength or lower
ECC height replacement ratio) provided by steel reinforcement
can counterpoise concrete compression, then maximum tensile
strain of steel reinforcement decreases accordingly. So, the ulti-
mate curvature decreases as the strain of steel reinforcement
decreases while the ultimate concrete crushing compressive strain
is a fixed value.
For composite beams with lower reinforcement ratio (qs =
0.6%), yield moment, yield curvature, ultimate moment and ulti-
mate curvature increase with increasing the ECC strength or the
ECC height replacement ratio. So, ductility and energy dissipation
ratio essentially unchanging, but the energy dissipation gradually
increases. For composite beams with higher reinforcement ratio
(qs = 1.53%), yield moment, yield curvature and ultimate moment
increase while ultimate curvature significantly decreases with
increasing the ECC strength or the ECC height replacement ratio.
So, ductility, energy dissipation and energy dissipation ratio grad-
ually decrease.
6.2. Amount of steel reinforcement
The correlation curves of mechanical behavior and reinforce-
ment ratio qs are shown in Fig. 14. Ten reinforcement ratios qs
(0.19%, 0.38%, 0.60%, 0.86%, 1.03%, 1.20%, 1.36%, 1.63%, 1.83% and
1.96%) and two tensile strengths of ECC (fetc1 = 2.0 Nmm2, fetu1
= 2.4 Nmm2, fetc2 = 4.0 Nmm2 and fetu2 = 4.8 Nmm2) are stud-
ied. The notation used in Fig. 12 is explained below: ECC-2.0-A
indicates a composite beam with ECC tensile strength fetc = 2.0
Nmm2 and A indicates incur tensile failure, B indicates incur
compressive failure and C indicates incur over-reinforced failure.
As can be seen from Fig. 14, the ultimate moment increases
with increasing the reinforcement ratio; however, the increasing
rate before balanced failure point 2 is much higher than that after
balanced failure point 2. As ECC-4.0 can provide more tensile resis-
tance than ECC-2.0, the reinforcement ratio of balanced failure
point 1 and point 2 of ECC-4.0 are lower than that of ECC-2.0.
With increasing the reinforcement ratio, the ultimate curvature
gradually increases before balanced failure point 1, significantly
decreases before balanced failure point 2, and then smoothly
decreases after point 2. For tensile failure stage, the tensile rapture
strain of steel reinforcement is a fixed value. With increasing the
reinforcement ratio, steel reinforcement can provide more tensile
resistance, maximum concrete compressive strain increases and,
then, the ultimate curvature increases correspondingly. For com-
pressive failure mode, ultimate concrete compressive crushing
strain is a fixed value. With increasing the reinforcement ratio,
lower tensile stress/strain of steel reinforcement can provide
enough tensile resistance to counterpoise concrete compression,
and then ultimate curvature decreases correspondingly.
Yield moment, yield curvature, ultimate moment and ultimate
curvature increase with increasing the reinforcement ratio before
balanced failure point 1, and the increase rate of ultimate curva-
ture is lower than that of yield curvature. So, ductility and energy
dissipation ratio gradually decrease, and energy dissipation gradu-
ally increases. Yield moment, yield curvature and ultimate
moment increase but ultimate curvature decreases between bal-
anced failure point 1 and point 2. So, ductility decreases faster,
and energy dissipation ration gradually decrease.
6.3. Strength of steel reinforcement
The correlation curves of mechanical behavior and strength of
steel reinforcement are shown in Fig. 15. Four standard yield
strengths of steel reinforcement fyk (300 Nmm2, 335 Nmm2,
400 Nmm2 and 500 Nmm2) and two reinforcement ratios qs
(0.6% and 1.53%) are studied.
As can be seen from Fig. 15, yield moment and ultimate
moment increase with increasing the strength of steel reinforce-
ment. Composite beams with lower reinforcement ratio (qs =
0.6%) all incur tensile failure, whereas, composite beams with
 W.-J. Ge et al. / Construction and Building Materials 159 (2018) 175–188
(a) Yield moment and ultimate moment - rh
(c) Ultimate curvature and ductility - rh
(e) Energy disspation and
energy dissipation ratio - r h
Fig. 13. Effect of ECC Strength and height replacement ratio.
higher reinforcement ratio (qs = 1.53%) incur tensile failure before
balanced failure point 1 and then incur compressive failure.
For composite beams with lower reinforcement ratio
(qs = 0.6%), failure modes are tensile failure - rupture of steel rein-
forcement, the tensile rapture strain of steel reinforcement is a
fixed value. With increasing the strength of steel reinforcement,
steel reinforcement can provide more tensile resistance, maximum
concrete compressive strain increases to provide more resistance
to counterpoise the tension, and then ultimate curvature increases
correspondingly. For composite beams with higher reinforcement
ratio (qs = 1.53%), ultimate curvature increases before point 1 and
then decreases.
For composite beams with 0.6% reinforcement ratio, yield
moment, yield curvature, ultimate moment and ultimate curvature
increase with increasing the strength of steel reinforcement. How-
ever, the increase rate of ultimate curvature is lower than that of
yield curvature. So, ductility and energy dissipation ratio gradually
decrease but energy dissipation increases. For composite beams
with 1.53% reinforcement ratio, the situation is the same as com-
185
(b) Yield moment and ultimate moment - fetu
(d) Ultimate curvature and Ductility - fetu
(f) Energy dissipation and
energy dissipation ratio - fetu
posite beams with 0.6% reinforcement ratio before balanced failure
point 1. However, ultimate curvature decreases after point 1. So,
energy dissipation and energy dissipation ratio decrease and duc-
tility decreases faster.
6.4. Concrete strength
The correlation curves of mechanical behavior and concrete
strength are shown in Fig. 16. Eight concrete grades (C25, C30,
C35, C40, C45, C50, C55 and C60) and two reinforcement ratios
qs (0.6% and 1.53%) are studied.
As can be seen from Fig. 16, yield and ultimate moment increase
with increasing the concrete strength, and the increasing rate of
beams with higher reinforcement ratio (qs = 1.53%) are higher than
that of beams with lower reinforcement ratio (qs = 0.6%) due to the
failure mode in each case, tensile and compressive failure, respec-
tively. In case of tensile rupture of steel reinforcement, increasing
the concrete strength is not as effective as the compressive failure
of concrete.
186 W.-J. Ge et al. / Construction and Building Materials 159 (2018) 175–188

(a) Ultimate moment (b) Ultimate curvature and Ductility

(c) Energy dissipation and energy dissipation ratio

Fig. 14. Effect of reinforcement ratio.

(a) Yield moment and ultimate moment (b) Ultimate curvature and Ductility

(c) Energy dissipation and energy dissipation ratio

Fig. 15. Effect of strength of steel bars.

For composite beams with 0.6% reinforcement ratio, failure strain can provide enough compression to counterpoise the
modes are tensile failure - rapture of steel reinforcement. With tensile resistance, and then ultimate curvature decreases
increasing concrete strength, lower concrete compressive stress/ correspondingly.
 W.-J. Ge et al. / Construction and Building Materials 159 (2018) 175–188
(a) Yield moment and ultimate moment
(c) Energy dissipation and energy dissipation ratio
Fig. 16. Effect of concrete strength.
For composite beams with 1.53% reinforcement ratio, failure
modes before point 1 are compressive failure – crushing of con-
crete. With increasing the concrete strength, concrete can provide
more resistance, tensile stress/strains of steel reinforcement
increase to counterpoise concrete compression, and then ultimate
curvature increase correspondingly. Failure modes after point 1 are
tensile failure, then ultimate curvature decrease.
For composite beams with 0.6% reinforcement ratio, yield and
ultimate moment increase while yield curvature and ultimate cur-
vature decrease with increasing the concrete strength. However,
the decreasing rate of ultimate curvature is lower than that of yield
curvature. Therefore, ductility gradually increases, energy
dissipation and energy dissipation ratio essentially unchanged.
On the other hand, for composite beams with 1.53% reinforcement
ratio, yield and ultimate moment increase while yield curvature
decreases with increasing the strength of concrete, ultimate
curvature increases before balanced failure point 1 and then
decreases. So, ductility, energy dissipation and energy dissipation
ratio gradually increase before point 1 and then essentially
unchanged.
7. Conclusions
Mechanical behavior of composite beams is analysed and para-
metric analysis is conducted. The following conclusions are
obtained:
(1) Based on the simplified constitutive models of materials and
equilibrium of internal forces and moment, formulas for
cracking, yield and ultimate moment as well as deflection
are derived. Good agreement between the predicted and
experimental results was obtained, confirming the applica-
bility of the proposed formulas for use in practice.
187
(b) Ultimate curvature and Ductility
(2) Yield moment and ultimate moments increase with increas-
ing the tensile resistance, for example by increasing ECC
height replacement ratio, reinforcement ratio, strength of
steel reinforcement and ECC. However, with increasing the
concrete compressive strength, yield and ultimate moments
increase in case of compressive failure, but essentially
unchanged in case of tensile failure.
(3) With increasing the tensile resistance, for example by
increasing ECC height replacement ratio, reinforcement
ratio, strength of steel reinforcement and ECC, ultimate cur-
vature increases in case of tensile failure and decreases in
case of compressive failure. With increasing the concrete
strength, ultimate curvature decreases in case of tensile fail-
ure but increases in case of compressive failure. Ultimate
curvature essentially unchanged in case of over-reinforced
beams.
(4) In case of compressive failure, ductility decreases with
increasing the tensile resistance, for example by increasing
ECC height replacement ratio, reinforcement ratio, strength
of steel reinforcement and ECC, but increases with increas-
ing the concrete strength. On the other hand, in case of ten-
sile failure, ductility essentially unchanged with increasing
the ECC height replacement ratio and the ECC strength, grad-
ually decreases with increasing the reinforcement ratio and
the strength of steel reinforcement, but increases with
increasing the concrete strength. Ductility essentially
unchanged for over-reinforced beams.
(5) With increasing the tensile resistance, for example by
increasing ECC height replacement ratio, reinforcement
ratio, strength of steel reinforcement and ECC, energy dissi-
pation increases in case of tensile failure but decreases in
case of compressive failure. With increasing the concrete
strength, energy dissipation essentially unchanged in case
188 W.-J. Ge et al. / Construction and Building Materials 159 (2018) 175–188
of tensile failure but increases in case of compressive
failure. Energy dissipation essentially unchanged for over-
reinforced beams.
(6) Energy dissipation ratio decreases with increasing the ten-
sile resistance, for example by increasing reinforcement
ratio and strength of steel reinforcement, but essentially
unchanged with increasing the ECC height replacement ratio
and the ECC strength in case of tensile failure. With increas-
ing the concrete strength, energy dissipation ratio essen-
tially unchanged in case of tensile failure but increase in
case of compressive failure. Energy dissipation ratio essen-
tially unchanged for over-reinforced beams.
Acknowledgement
The authors appreciate the support of the National Natural
Science Foundation of China (51678514, 51308490), the Natural
Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province, China (BK20130450), Six
Talent Peaks Project of Jiangsu Province (JZ-038, 2016), Graduate
Practice Innovation Project of Jiangsu Province (SJCX17-0625)
and the Jiangsu Government Scholarship for Overseas Studies.
References
[1] C. Li Victor, Shuxin Wang, Wu Cynthia, Tensile strain-hardening behavior of
PVA-ECC, ACI Mater. J. 98 (6) (2001) 483–492.
[2] Hezhi Liu, Qian Zhang, Gu. Chongshi, Su. Huaizhi, Victor Li, Self-healing of
microcracks in engineered cementitious composites under sulfate and chloride
environment, Constr. Build. Mater. 153 (2017) 948–956.
[3] Chung-Chan Hung, Su. Yen-Fang, Medium-term self-healing evaluation of
engineered cementitious composites with varying amounts of fly ash and
exposure durations, Constr. Build. Mater. 118 (2016) 194–203.
[4] Wu Chao, V.C. Li, CFRP-ECC hybrid for strengthening of the concrete structures,
Compos. Struct. 175 (15) (2017) 372–382.
[5] Erdoğan Özbay, Okan Karahan, Mohamed Lachemi, Cengiz Duran Atis, Dual
effectiveness of freezing-thawing and sulfate attack on high-volume slag-
incorporated ECC, Compos. Part B-Eng. 45 (1) (2013) 1384–1390.
[6] Hamid Reza Pakravan, Masoud Jamshidi, Masoud Latifi, Study on fiber
hybridization effect of engineered cementitious composites with low-and
high-modulus polymeric fibers, Constr. Build. Mater. 112 (2016) 739–746.
[7] Hui Ma, Jingming Cai, Zhan Lin, Victor Li, CaCO3 whisker modified Engineered
Cementitious Composite with local ingredients, Constr. Build. Mater. 151
(2017) 1–8.
[8] Junxia Li, En-Hua Yang, Macroscopic and microstructural properties of
engineered cementitious composites incorporating recycled concrete fines,
Cem. Concr. Compos. 78 (2017) 33–42.
[9] Mustafa Sahmaran, Erdogan Özbay, Hasan Erhan Yücel, Victor Li, Frost
resistance and microstructure of engineered cementitious composites:
influence of fly ash and micro poly-vinyl-alcohol fiber, Cem. Concr. Compos.
34 (2) (2012) 156–165.
[10] Jing Yu, Hedong Li, Christopher K.Y. Leung, Kaimin Shih, Matrix design for
waterproof Engineered Cementitious Composites (ECCs), Constr. Build. Mater.
139 (2017) 438–446.
[11] Shamsher Bahadur Singh, Madappa V.R. Sivasubramanian, Flexural response of
ECC strengthened reinforced concrete beams, Indian Concr. J. 87 (7) (2013)
35–44.
[12] Wang Nan, Xu Shi-lang, Flexural response of reinforced concrete beams
strengthened with post-poured ultra high toughness cementitious composites
layer, J. Cent. South Univ. 18 (3) (2011) 932–939.
[13] Mykolas Daugevicius, Juozas Valivonis, Tomas Skuturna, Vladimir Popov, RC
Beams strengthened with HPFRCC: experimental and numerical results, J. Civ.
Eng. Manage. 22 (2) (2016) 254–270.
[14] M. Maalej, V.C. Li, Introduction of strain-hardening engineered cementitious
composites in design of reinforced concrete flexural members for improved
durability, ACI Struct. J. 92 (2) (1995) 167–176.
[15] M. Maalej, K.S. Leong, Engineered cementitious composites for effective FRP-
strengthening of RC beams, Compos. Sci. Technol. 65 (7–8) (2005) 1120–1128.
[16] M. Maalej, S.T. Quek, Faiz Uddin Ahmed Shaikh, K.S. Leong, Review of potential
structural applications of hybrid fiber engineered cementitious composites,
Constr. Build. Mater. 36 (11) (2012) 216–227.
[17] Xu. Shilang, Nan Wang, Qinghua Li, Experimental study on the flexural
performance of concrete beam strengthened with ultra-high toughness
cementitious composites, Chin. Civ. Eng. J. 43 (5) (2010) 17–22.
[18] Xiufang Zhang, Xu Shilang, Hedong Li, Theoretical analysis of flexural
performance of plain concrete beams strengthened with ultra-high
toughness cementitious composites, Chin. Civ. Eng. J. 43 (7) (2010) 51–62.
[19] Jun Zhang, Christopher K.Y. Leung, Yin Nee Cheung, Flexural performance of
layered ECC-concrete composite beam, Compos. Sci. Technol. 66 (11–12)
(2006) 1501–1512.
[20] Jun Zhang, Zhenbo Wang, Ju. Xianchun, Zhenjie Shi, Simulation of flexural
performance of layered ECC-concrete composite beam with fracture
mechanics model, Eng. Fract. Mech. 131 (2014) 419–438.
[21] Yi-Wei Lin, Derek Lawley, Liam Wotherspoon, Jason Ingham, Out-of-plane
testing of unreinforced masonry walls strengthened using ECC shotcrete,
Structures 7 (2016) 33–42.
[22] S.B. Singh, Richa Patil, Pankaj Munjal, Study of flexural response of engineered
cementitious composite faced masonry structures, Eng. Struct. 150 (1) (2017)
786–802.
[23] Ayoub Dehghani, Fariborz Nateghi-Alahi, Gregor Fischer, Engineered
cementitious composites for strengthening masonry infilled reinforced
concrete frames, Eng. Struct. 105 (2015) 197–208.
[24] Rui Zhang, Koji Matsumoto, Takayoshi Hirata, Junichiro Niwa, Application of
PP-ECC in beam–column joint connections of rigid-framed railway bridges to
reduce transverse reinforcements, Eng. Struct. 86 (2015) 146–156.
[25] Salahuddin Qudah, M. Maalej, Application of Engineered Cementitious
Composites (ECC) in interior beam-column connections for enhanced
seismic resistance, Eng. Struct. 69 (9) (2014) 235–245.
[26] Shwan H. Said, Hashim Abdul Razak, Structural behavior of RC engineered
cementitious composite (ECC) exterior beam–column joints under reversed
cyclic loading, Constr. Build. Mater. 107 (2016) 226–234.
[27] Shao-Bo Kang, Kang-Hai Tan, En-Hua Yang, Progressive collapse resistance of
precast beam-column sub-assemblages with engineered cementitious
composites, Eng. Struct. 98 (2015) 186–200.
[28] Hezhi Liu, Qian Zhang, Victor Li, Gu Chongshi, Durability study on engineered
cementitious composites (ECC) under sulfate and chloride environment,
Constr. Build. Mater. 133 (2017) 171–181.
[29] Scott Muzenski, Ismael Flores Vivian, Konstantin Sobolev, Hydrophobic
engineered cementitious composites for highway applications, Cem. Concr.
Compos. 57 (2012) 68–74.
[30] Manish A. Kewalramani, Osama Mohamed, Zubair Imam Syed, Engineered
cementitious composites for modern civil engineering structures in hot arid
coastal climatic conditions, Procedia Eng. 180 (2017) 767–774.
[31] Aiqin Zhao, Jinglei Yang, En-Hua Yang, Self-cleaning engineered cementitious
composites, Cem. Concr. Compos. 64 (25) (2012) 74–83.
[32] Shunzhi Qian, Victor Li, H. Zhang, G.A. Keoleian, Life cycle analysis of pavement
overlays made with Engineered Cementitious Composites, Cem. Concr.
Compos. 35 (1) (2013) 78–88.
[33] China Academy of Building Research, Code for Design of Concrete Structures
GB50010-2010, China Building Industry Press, Beijing, 2010.
[34] Fang Yuan, Jinlong Pan, C.K.Y. Leung, Flexural behaviors of ECC and concrete/
ECC composite beams reinforced with basalt fiber-reinforced polymer, J.
Compos. Constr. 17 (5) (2013) 591–602.
[35] Yun Xu, Jinlong Pan, Flexural behaviors of double-reinforced ECC beams, J.
Southeast Univ. 29 (1) (2013) 66–72 (English Edition).
[36] China Academy of Building Research, Standard for Test Method of Concrete
Structures GB 50152–2012, China Building Industry Press, Beijing, 2012.
[37] China Academy of Building Research, Standard for test Method of Mechanical
Properties on Ordinary Concrete GB/T50081-2002, China Building Industry
Press, Beijing, 2003.
[38] General Administration of Quality Supervision,, Inspection and Quarantine of
the People’s Republic of China. Metallic Materials Tensile Testing at Ambient
Temperature GB/T228-2002, Standards press of China, Beijing, 2002.
[39] Biyuan Wang, Wenjie Ge, Jingjing Zhou, Dafu Cao, Preparation and mechanic
behaviors of engineered cementitious composites, J. Yangzhou Univ. (Nat. Sci.
Ed.) 18 (3) (2015) 64–69.